Swings and roundabouts – managers in West London

What an exciting week for managers in West London. Roberto di Matteo, who has fully exposed the role of randomness in football, lost his job soon after guiding a rudderless team to the biggest prize in club football. Mull over that for a while. He’s been dismissed because he isn’t the person who can take the team to the next level, where they might…. But probably won’t…. win the very prize di Matteo has already secured for them.

As I say though, randomness. Or not. Di Matteo is an ordinary manager who was just what Chelsea needed at the time, and he got lucky enough to win big. That doesn’t mean he’s the right man to repeat the trick, but the logic is a bit weird. No wonder, as Howard Wilkinson recently said, football managers are a very stressed group.

And so to Mark Hughes. The thing here is that Hughes is a decent manager. He has proved that. We don’t like him for obvious reasons but it’s not like he did a terrible job for Fulham. We struggled at Christmas but got better afterwards. There are no rules about having to get good results in any particular order and while there were rumours that player power had instigated a shift in philosophy we can’t really know, and in any case, Hughes was savvy enough to not get in the way of whatever did change. In retrospect it’s a big relief that we didn’t get to feel the full force of his nous in the transfer market, but he did okay for Fulham, just as he had for Blackburn and to an extent Manchester City.

Lawrie Sanchez’s time in charge of Fulham showed us just how negative a home crowd can get when things aren’t going well. By the time the winter months came around the early season bad luck hadn’t reversed itself and results were bad. Sanchez was – rather like Hughes – making bullish statements to the media, but at the ground it took very little time for the crowd to get twitchy. Every misplaced pass would lead to a gradual building of nerves, and the players must have felt this. Leaving the Newcastle home game was pretty horrible, all the negativity and anger. I understand how football fans are but a lot of it got a bit personal and that didn’t feel right.

I’m sure QPR are in a similar position, vibe-wise. If the owner were to say that Hughes has three more years, come what may, I’m sure he’d be rewarded with the progress he expected in the first place. QPR are a half-decent side, apparently lacking in defenders who can defend, and probably won’t finish bottom. Hughes could have seen to that.

Harry Redknapp seems to specialise in these kinds of rolls. When he took over Spurs they were in a manifestly false position and would have risen in due course had almost anyone taken over. Sure enough, they rebounded back to where they’d been under Martin Jol, and Redknapp got the plaudits.

The same thing will almost certainly happen here if he gets the job. QPR will finish lower mid-table, we might assume – would have done so under Hughes – but Redknapp will get the credit for the transformation.

What he will also do is weed out half of the squad, which probably does need doing. I’ve been kind to Hughes above, but no high turnover business has any reason to be paying someone like AJ a Premier League wage. Johnson hasn’t played much for an eternity and hasn’t been prolific for even longer. I think QPR are Kieron Dyer’s latest benefactors, too. Who’s making these decisions?

I don’t know that either decision is really the right one. In football you win some and you lose some. Chelsea are a good team by Champions League standards, and last year reached the upper limits of what their talent could achieve. This year they’ve merely got the other side of the same coin. It happens. We don’t quite know how good QPR really are – they’ve turned over their players so often in recent times there’s nothing really to go on – but on paper their squad looks decent enough. A team good enough to finish 12th will sometimes look like a 20th placed team (or it could be a 20th placed team). Sometimes you have to be patient. It’ll be very expensive to remake the squad in the new manager’s chosen style, after all (as it would be expensive to be relegated, too). Newcastle weren’t daft in giving Alan Pardew that long deal. In a flash they’re saying that they are in this for the long run, that while they acknowledge there will be ups and downs, this is more or less normal and not something to panic about.

7 thoughts on “Swings and roundabouts – managers in West London

  1. Boom! You wait all week for a post and then two come along together :-)

    Is Hughes a good manager? His reputation currently seems to rest entirely on what he achieved with Blackburn. When he took over at Fulham I remember City fans telling us he was rubbish and dismissed it a little. Did Hughes turn around our form that season or was it players taking a bit of control and reverting to the Hodgson style they knew?

    I guess we’ll never really know that, but his transfer activity at Rangers smacks of someone throwing money around on name players rather than any awareness of what his team really needed.

    Will be interesting to see what he achieves at his next club.

    1. yeah, sorry about that. Been mad busy at work but temporarily pausing while waiting for someone to send me something.

      It’s a good point. Maybe he’s not a good manager but enough people seem to speak well of him (or is that just what peope do in football, lest they come across him again?).

  2. When AVB was sacked by Chelsea he left a divided and unhappy squad. Di Matteo got that sorted and was rewarded with a huge improvement in their performance, not to mention some fairly significant silverware. Even if he wasn’t the right man for the long term, I can’t disagree with all those Chelsea supporters who thought he should stay until the end of the season.

    Hughes appeared not only to have an inflated opinion of his own ability, but insisted on broadcasting the fact in a way which belittled his employers (Fulham). As Steve Claridge pointed out the other day, how many of his QPR signings have performed up to their transfer value / salary level? He didn’t do a bad job at Fulham, but you sensed that unless he was given more money to play with than was prudent for a club of our size, he would use it as an excuse for underperforming.

  3. “rumours that player power had instigated a shift in philosophy we can’t really know, and in any case, Hughes was savvy enough to not get in the way of whatever did change.” Doesn’t sound like he learns much from experience though does it if the rumours of team unrest at QPR are to be believed. Managing a football team is about man management not coaching. Alex Ferguson doesn’t teach RVP how to shoot, pass etc? No, he massages a bunch of overpaid egos into playing together and does it very well. Hughes hasn’t been able to do that at QPR, despite having a bunch of cash to throw around, or maybe because of it.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s